June 21, 2026
Scan-tastic or scan-dalous?
I was wrong about the Midjourney ultra-sound scanner
Doctor backs off AI scan slam as commenters cheer, side-eye, and yell culture war
TLDR: The doctor who blasted Midjourney’s ultrasound scanner now admits it could be useful if people can safely repeat scans often instead of jumping to risky tests. Commenters are split between hopeful applause, culture-war exhaustion, and blunt suspicion that this is just another overhyped AI circus.
A doctor who confidently trashed Midjourney’s ultrasound scanner just posted the internet’s favorite sequel: the public walk-back. His new take is basically, “Okay, I missed something obvious.” The big revelation? If scans become cheap, safe, and easy enough to repeat every week, doctors might be able to watch suspicious spots over time instead of rushing people into risky procedures. That matters because, as he explains, most scary-looking findings turn out to be harmless — and historically, the hunt for the dangerous few has caused plenty of harm on its own.
But the comments? That’s where the real fireworks are. One camp was surprisingly supportive, with people saying we should applaud any real attempt at painless, non-invasive medical tools, even if nobody can yet promise it’ll save lives. Another camp immediately hit the brakes, warning that every shiny new “democratized” tech miracle tends to get messy before it gets better. And then came the classic internet derailment: people complaining the whole thing was being argued like a culture-war cage match instead of a health discussion.
There was also some wonderfully chaotic side chatter. One commenter popped in with a deadpan “This is AI right?”, which honestly doubles as the mood of 2026. Another tried to turn the scanner into the world’s fanciest body-fat detective. And one especially spicy critic went for the throat, asking whether this even belongs on Hacker News at all, accusing the post of being AI-booster content and proof that standards are slipping. So yes: possible medical breakthrough, but also a full-blown comments-section soap opera.
Key Points
- •The author retracts or softens an earlier claim that the proposed Midjourney ultrasound scanner was a bad idea.
- •They argue that prior negative experience with broad screening imaging involved technologies that were expensive, inconvenient, physician-gated, and not suitable for frequent short-term repetition.
- •The article says a cheap, harmless, high-resolution, repeatable ultrasound device could allow weekly monitoring of suspicious findings instead of immediate invasive procedures.
- •The author states that apparent medical intuition is insufficient and that several years of data would be needed to show whether the approach actually saves lives.
- •The article explains that most detected abnormalities are not cancer, and that harms from biopsies or removals of harmless findings have historically offset or exceeded screening benefits.